Search

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) with biventricular pacing (BVP) is a well-established therapy in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, heart failure, and left bundle branch block. Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has recently been shown to be a feasible and effective alternative to BVP. Comparative data on the risk of complications between LBBAP and BVP among patients undergoing CRT are lacking., Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term risk of procedure-related complications between LBBAP and BVP in a cohort of patients undergoing CRT., Methods: This prospective, multicenter, observational study enrolled 668 consecutive patients (mean age 71.2 ± 10.0 years; 52.2% male; 59.4% with New York Heart Association class III-IV heart failure symptoms) with left ventricular ejection fraction 33.4% ± 4.3% who underwent BVP (n = 561) or LBBAP (n = 107) for a class I or II indication for CRT. Propensity score matching for baseline characteristics yielded 93 matched pairs. The rate and nature of intraprocedural and long-term post-procedural complications occurring during follow-up were prospectively collected and compared between the 2 groups., Results: During a mean follow-up of 18 months, procedure-related complications were observed in 16 patients: 12 in BVP (12.9%) and 4 in LBBAP (4.3%) (P = .036). Compared with patients who underwent LBBAP, those who underwent BVP showed a lower complication-free survival (P = .032). In multivariate analysis, BVP resulted an independent predictive factor associated with a higher risk of complications (hazard ratio 3.234; P = .042). Complications related to the coronary sinus lead were most frequently observed in patients who underwent BVP (50.0% of all complications)., Conclusion: LBBAP was associated with a lower long-term risk of device-related complications compared with BVP in patients with an indication for CRT., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Conduction system pacing (CSP) using His bundle pacing (HBP) or left bundle branch area pacing (LBBAP) has emerged as an alternative to right ventricular pacing (RVP). Comparative data on the risk of complications between CSP and RVP are lacking., Objective: This prospective, multicenter, observational study aimed to compare the long-term risk of device-related complications between CSP and RVP., Methods: A total of 1029 consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker implantation with CSP (including HBP and LBBAP) or RVP were enrolled. Propensity score matching for baseline characteristics yielded 201 matched pairs. The rate and nature of device-related complications occurring during follow-up were prospectively collected and compared between the 2 groups., Results: During a mean follow-up duration of 18 months, device-related complications were observed in 19 patients: 7 in RVP (3.5%) and 12 in CSP (6.0%) (P = .240). On dividing the matched cohort into 3 groups with similar baseline characteristics according to pacing modality (RVP, n = 201; HBP, n = 128; LBBAP, n = 73), patients with HBP showed a significantly higher rate of device-related complications than did patients with RVP (8.6% vs 3.5%; P = .047) and patients with LBBAP (8.6% vs 1.3%; P = .034). Patients with LBBAP showed a rate of device-related complications similar to that of patients with RVP (1.3% vs 3.5%; P = .358). Most of the complications observed in patients with HBP (63.6%) were lead related., Conclusion: Globally, CSP was associated with a risk of complications similar to that of RVP. Considering HBP and LBBAP separately, HBP showed a significantly higher risk of complications than did both RVP and LBBAP whereas LBBAP showed a risk of complications similar to that of RVP., (Copyright © 2023 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In patients with unexplained syncope and bifascicular block (BFB), syncope may be caused by intermittent atrioventricular (AV) block. When a correlation between syncope and bradyarrhythmia is not documented in these patients, 2 alternative management strategies can be adopted: (1) empiric pacemaker (PM) implantation or (2) long-term continuous electrocardiographic monitoring by implantable loop recorder (ILR)., Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the risk of syncope recurrence associated with empiric PM implantation or ILR monitoring., Methods: A prospective, multicenter, observational study enrolled consecutive patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope and BFB who underwent ILR monitoring or empiric PM implantation. The risk and causes of syncope recurrence were assessed and compared between the 2 groups. Individual 1:1 propensity matching of baseline characteristics was performed., Results: A total of 309 consecutive patients (age 77.2 ± 12.2 years; 60.8% male) were enrolled. Propensity matching yielded 89 matched pairs. After median follow-up of 33 months, empiric PM implantation was associated with a significantly lower risk of syncope recurrence than ILR monitoring (19.1 vs 46.1%; P <.001). A total of 35 patients (39.3%) who underwent ILR monitoring developed bradyarrhythmias (68.6% paroxysmal AV block) requiring PM implantation during follow-up. Excluding bradyarrhythmic syncope, the most frequent causes of syncope recurrence in both study groups were reflex syncope and orthostatic hypotension., Conclusion: In patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope and BFB, empiric PM implantation significantly reduced the risk of syncope recurrence in comparison with ILR monitoring. A high rate of patients who underwent ILR monitoring developed bradyarrhythmias requiring PM implantation., (Copyright © 2022 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Percutaneous removal of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) leads is a difficult procedure because of the consequence of massive fibrous tissue growth along the lead., Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe the occurrence and location of fibrous adherences in ICD lead extraction and to identify potential predictors among patient and lead characteristics., Methods: We studied 637 consecutive patients who underwent transvenous extraction of 678 ICD leads from 1997 to 2013., Results: Procedural success rate was 99%, without major complications. Areas of adherence were found in the subclavian vein (78%), innominate vein (65%), superior vena cava (66%), and heart (73%). Dwell-time, passive fixation, and dual-coil lead design were independently associated with adherences. Dual-coil lead design was associated with adherences in the innominate vein and superior vena cava, whereas coil treatment (eg, expandable polytetrafluoroethylene-coated or medical adhesive back-filled strategies) prevented adherences. Passive fixation mechanism was associated with adherences in the heart., Conclusion: ICD leads, after long dwell-time, are affected by fibrous adherences uniformly distributed along the lead course. Lead features represent major predictors of the phenomenon. Careful lead selection is recommended at the time of implantation to prevent adherences. In addition, lead-related risk stratification is mandatory before a transvenous extraction procedure., (Copyright © 2014 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)